Moving to a World of Entrepreneurial Success and
Business Sustainability in the Competitive Environment
Mahesh Ramakrishna Pillai Associate Professor College of Business
University of Modern Sciences, Dubai
Faculty, College of Business Administration American University in the Emirates, Dubai
Abstract:- The acceptance of the small business enterprises across the globe is something which needs to be looked upon as small business over a period turns to be a big business enterprises or remain at the level it was established or even die down due to the competitive business environment. It has been looked upon that the existence rate of small business is very limited as well the percentage of industries survive to success and to long term sustainability is even much less. In this paper, it is tried to explain the role of entrepreneurial leadership qualities for the sustainability of entrepreneurial enterprises. Further the study explores further into the relevance of development of the appropriate skills for entrepreneurial success for business sustainability. The study explains that the research has much to say related to the values based on which entrepreneurs can establish an exceptional enterprise with a long-term sustainability. The studies in this area were exploring into the factors contributing to the sustainability of the business enterprise. The paper is trying to explain the success of certain firms through any positive or even adverse external factors. They were trying to identify what it was that enabled some companies to be continuously successful through negative and positive external conditions.
The study finding have significant implications for the sustainability of entrepreneurial activity since they suggest much prolife, success centered business acumen be able to gather attention and resources. Further they can bring about meaningful change and development, even when the people concerned do not have the real attributes and values to be successful and sustainable entrepreneur. The factor for sustainability focusses is on success of the enterprise and not the entrepreneur. This is much evident, basically on long-term development and sustainability but never on the short terms rewards, much focused on values and standards of organization.
Keywords:- Management Efficiency; Sustainable Growth; Entrepreneurs.
A decade back the book written by Jim Collins titled Good to Great asks the question that why few companies makes a good leap while others cannot. This has been more a concern among leading small and medium enterprises. The challenges for the small and medium enterprises for its survival in the market are numerous, can overcome only through skill and efforts.
Researchers in this area have found that the rate of survival of small and medium business enterprises is limited while it is seen that the rate of survival of industries in this sector from growth to establishment to exitance has become even more difficult in these decades.
Dyllic and Hockerts (2002) states that quite many researchers felt that major cause for the disaster for any industry is of the mainly due to lack of information from the market and the inefficiency of forecasting methods, related to the market trends as well as utilization of innovative business practices.
The research in this area is trying the best to explore the areas related to sustainability of the small and medium business enterprises and the lead role of the effectiveness of the management in organizing a constant vision and vigil to upkeep the industry against the changes in the business culture and value across the globe.
Goodness of Fit or Greatness of Fit was the question of enquiry while conducting the study. Extensive research was conducted across various small and medium scale enterprises. The study was aimed to make a strategic evaluation of successful and unsuccessful enterprises with sustained performance and not growth. The sudy was mainly done across companies over 20 years of existence. Does this have some relevance over start-ups as well as other entrepreneurial ventures? Fellnhofer et al (2014) feels that the message was clear that every company had a small beginning, but gained a much better momentum and capital gain, which proved to be successful, in terms of maximizing the capacity through effective and efficient managerial skills. The major accomplishment is that they did the best from the beginning to gain and to sustain success over an extended period for a much greater degree than their competitors existing during some point of time.
The study revealed that the sustained success was achieved through certain specific factors but not limited to these factors: -
Managerial Efficiency and effectiveness: - Level 5 leadership; that is leaders who have a range of characteristics that include: self-effacement, reserve, humility and strong professional will.
Ability to understand and forecast market changes and market challenges.
The performance of high achievers is copied and controlled Exploring and Identifying the pitfalls or promissory
Motivating employees through the Hedgehog concept namely
To build passion for what you do. To create the ability to become the
Best in the world at what you do and
To create an awareness of what drives the business scenario.
To develop a culture of industrial passion and commit to a promise.
Develop to inherit for change and commitment. A commitment to recognize the BEST.
Kaplan and Norton (2001) explains that the success can never be highlighted as the cause of one or two of the above factors. It is a multiple effect of many related factors in fact required to ensure sustainable success and commitment.
In this paper the efficiency and effectiveness of the management as well as its implications, is detailed in a better manner. Though the concept of the managerial efficiency is little dealt with, this paper is revolved across the Effective management and its efficient performance always leads to a sustained entrepreneurial success.
II. EFFICIENCY OF MANAGEMENT IN ENTREPRENEURIAL SUCCESS
Hoogendoorn et al (2015) Kardos (2012) and Markman et al (2016) identify that the efficiency and effectiveness of management is critical to entrepreneurial growth.
“Effective Management style, may it be dictatorial, democratic and Laissez-faire style it takes a very specific key role in the sustainability and success of entrepreneurial ventures. Entrepreneurial ventures is always focused on the main-brain entrepreneur, who is trusted to bring the culture in the organization, (Kardos, 2012), envisage a strategic plan (Parrish., 2010) as well as to explore to bring advantage of benefits and returns associated within the environment in which the organization is existed. (Hoogendoorn et al, 2015, Horish, 2015).
Researchers have gone all length and breadth to describe entrepreneurs. Risk bearing (Stokes, Wilson and Mador., 2010, Veciana., 2007), innovations and use of initiative (Ardichvili, Cardozo and Ray, 2003, De Clercq and Voronov 2011), desire for responsibility (Fellnhofer et al 2014), need for power (Di Domenico Haugh and Tracey, 2010), internal locus of control (Fellnhofer et al 2014), personal value orientation, [Hoogendoorn et al 2015, Kardos, 2012) need for achievement (Parrish, 2010, Patzelt and Shepherd, 2011, Kaplan and Norton 2001), Need for independence (Patzelt and Shepherd, 2011, Kaplan and Norton 2001).
Markman et al (2016) explains that there exist few dominant values explained to have developed over a period to explain the existence of entrepreneurs and their performance. This is inclusive of but not limited to:
Ability to commit towards risk Innovative and Creative Managerial Efficiency. Passion to excel
Searching for Opportunity
Self – determination and adjustability
Sheer determination and Commitment to objectives and Work even in conditions of ambiguity and uncertainty
The research in this area in relevant industries pointed towards few of the person-centered concerns than any profession centered approaches as a matter of success or failure among certain industries. The study among the people was oriented towards exploring in detail about identification of person centered concerns that have (Markman et al 2014, Parrish 2010) that have impact on their company and its growth.
The responses received from the survey and discussions were diverse based on the diversity of the industries, the multiple levels of the gains achieved by the industries of similar nature, the response of the employee and the interviewer attitudes as well as number of issues appeared to across the sample.
Responding to the organizational commitment and values Dealing with temporariness.
Organizational culture, values and commitment that brought sustainable growth
Employee’s sustainable growth Motivating employees
Co-ordinating the entrepreneurial values and commitment towards managerial success.
Continued inter-actions among entrepreneur and the organizational development
Any or some or all the above can have a cause and effect concern towards improving managerial efficiency and effectiveness.
The phase of transition as explained by the respondents in this study is well observed to arrive at a basic conclusion. (Spence et al 2011). Zahra et al (2009) seems to explain few concerns of rapid growth identified during the study which includes, but not limited to:-
Lack of tolerance towards top-down communication
Inadequacy and inconsistency in basic HR relations and values.
“The entrepreneur who keep his co-ordination and control in retaining his decision-making power as a “one’s own” activity is seen unwilling to delegate to subordinates or key performers.” (Zahra et al 2009).
It was recognized from the study that the very foundation on which the entrepreneur has built his business aimed towards sustained business can even create problems, in case the foundation is not well established, as organization develops. Not necessary to highlight, but needs to think that there arises a need to focus on detail, must set a “more structured” growth plan as well the sustained success needs an awareness of the impact of personality and professional values even when the concept will be premature for start-ups.
Nagel cited in Scarborough explains and examines the importance of managerial efficiency in the growing enterprise:
“The effectiveness and efficiency of a manager is explained as the one who identifies and sets clear goal committed to share the vision and values repeatedly and forcefully, teach, train as well as sets constraints to overcome for the co-workers to sustain as well as improve the processes, remains continuously committed to face adverse challenges as well as inspires challenges to manage and execute the entrepreneurial values and commitment towards accomplishment of any mission through continued and committed performance.” (Veciana, (2007)
Weber and Kratzer (2013) provides a practical definition of leadership, of what leaders do. “.it (leadership) produces movement. Throughout the ages, individuals who have been leaders have created change, sometimes for the better and sometimes not. They have done so in a variety of ways, though their actions often seem to boil down to establishing where a group of people should go, getting them lined up in that direction and committed to movement, and then energizing them to overcome the inevitable obstacles they will encounter along the way” Weber and Kratzer (2013).
The enquiry remains to be discussed as to whether organizations that were successful had efficient management which were committed towards distinctive characteristics and values other than the companies that never performed to the expected level. In the study, Spence (2011) identified few specific management styles that are attributed as it supposed to appear among successful companies and not in less successful ones.
Stokes, Wilson and Mador (2010) describes effective management as an exhibition of building challenging greatness through a paradoxical blend of professionalism and personal commitment to build an organization with value and culture.
Though the research could identify multiple differences in managerial effectiveness, as explained by researchers, mostly two characteristics were found to be similar to the situation of successful enterprises than unsuccessful from the lot that was
considered for the study. Management scholars were always explaining a way for defining and explaining effective management style which lead to the study of individual values namely personal attributes, (Spence 2011) individual behaviors, (Veciana, 2007) as well as roles and functions (Weber and Kratzer, 2013) without any specific outcomes. It was not the managerial effectiveness that was the focus of the study but the success and the method of approaching towards the success was the focus and the method of approach from the basic managerial perspective, attributes / behaviors that did appear in so called ‘great’ companies was basically concentrated, for which never appeared in less successful companies. Also, despite individual competencies, all successful managers could exhibit these characteristics.
The main quality that was recognized as part of the study was the professional will and personal commitment (Weber and Kratzer, 2013). This was demonstrated in numerous manners: ‘a clear performer in change from better to the best, who demonstrates commitment to resolve to do the best that can bring the sustainable result – no matter the challenges involved, developed based on set standards and evaluates based on standards and not on comparisons, to apportion the evidences of unsuccessful outcomes. (Parrish, 2010).
The other attribute that was recognized were that of personal humility and commitment. (Markman et al, 2016) The commitment towards profession was demonstrated in a different manner: ‘through a compelling respect, regards and value for others, working with determination and dedication, dedicated towards performance measures, decency, exhibiting and inviting employees to be motivated, channeling personal ambition towards professional gains, compare with achievers and not with one self for the success and even failures to share apportion credit in the event of success not for failures.’
The main attribute, professional will and personal commitment, identified by researchers was found to be consistent with all the entrepreneurial and effective management studies. Successful entrepreneurs and managers shared commitment as well as ability to face the challenges what so ever appeared in as an obstacle from reaching the target. The studies in sustainable entrepreneurial practices has always been a part of entrepreneurial personality with specific internal locus of control (Iyigun (2015) - explained as a belief of an individual in his / her ability to commit about change as well as a personal willingness to accept responsibility for actions taken.
specific distinction here as it was observed as if it is a search for leaders of great companies, rather than committed managers. It is suggested that an effective manager can bring the leadership qualities and values of being a charismatic, transformational, larger than life hero that might have been effective to bring any change in the organization. At times, it was observed that there existed limited success in these factors while building better companies over a period. The efficient managers who enjoyed celebrity can never or perhaps cannot be the best example of personal humility and commitment, yet humility was a characteristic of many efficient managers for example Matsushita, the entrepreneur who sustained in 20th century in Japan, even after the greatest challenges of World War II. (Patzelt and Shepherd, 2011).
Value towards Sustainability.
There exist no specific surprises related to the importance of entrepreneurs and efficient managerial ability that were being driven and focused on results. Earlier research in both managerial effectiveness and entrepreneurship could examine determination, challenging work as well as the ability to be adaptable to professional changes and challenges. (Kardos, 2012). But later it was observed that few other characteristics were not as self-evident, as well never found to appear in entrepreneurial management literatures. In any business culture which expects as well as propagates self-promotion, can decency, values, commitment, modesty, self-effacement and personal humility succeed? Can these factors be recognized as well as can the entrepreneurs exhibiting these qualities be able to persuade others to support the performance?
It can be found that the outcome as well as the related findings have significant implications for the sustainability of any entrepreneurial ventures, as it suggests that the high profile, success oriented individual, who are otherwise able to gain attention with the possible resources, and are willing to contribute towards meaningful change or development, might not exhibit the attributes and behaviors which are otherwise necessary towards the growth of any sustainable business. For sustainability of the business, the area of concentration of success is on the commitment towards the enterprise, and not the efficiency of the entrepreneur, on the long-term achievement plan for the organization, and not basically on any short terms commitments, rewards, or gains on the organizational values and standards other than the personal values and commitments.
The challenge is to focus on the improvement of the managerial effectiveness and efficiency to recognize the managerial quantum needed to guide the enterprise towards a sustainable growth, development and establishment.
A conclusion section is not required. Although a conclusion may review the main points of the paper, do not replicate the abstract as the conclusion. A conclusion might elaborate on the importance of the work or suggest applications and extensions.
The authors are indebted to the management and respondents from the industries for spending the time in expressing their views, which made it possible for the conduct of the research. The authors are indebted to the non-monetary support and co-operation they received from the organizations as they valued the concept of the project and was eager for understanding the conclusion from the project.
 Ardichvili, A., Cardozo, R. and Ray, S., 2003. A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and development. Journal of Business venturing, 18(1), pp.105-123.
 Cagno, E., Micheli, G, J, L., Jacinto, C., and Masi, D. (2014). An interpretive model of occupational safety performance for Small-and Medium-sized Enterprises. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 44, 60-74.  De Clercq, D. and Voronov, M., 2011. Sustainability in
entrepreneurship: A tale of two logics. International Small Business Journal, p.0266242610372460.
 Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H. and Tracey, P., 2010. Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(4), pp.681-703.
 Dyllick, T. and Hockerts, K., 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business strategy and the environment, 11(2), pp.130-141.
 Fellnhofer, K., Kraus, S. and Bouncken, R., 2014. Sustainable entrepreneurship: a current review of literature. International Journal of Business Research, 14(3), pp.163-172 30
 Hockerts, K. and Wüstenhagen, R., 2010. Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids— Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), pp.481-492.
 Hoogendoorn, B., Guerra, D. and van der Zwan, P., 2015. What drives environmental practices of SMEs?. Small Business Economics, 44(4), pp.759-781.
 Hörisch, J., 2015. The role of sustainable entrepreneurship in sustainability transitions: A conceptual synthesis against the background of the multi-level perspective. Administrative Sciences, 5(4), pp.286-300.
 İyigün, N.Ö., 2015. What could entrepreneurship do for sustainable
development? A corporate social responsibility-based approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, pp.1226-1231. 31
 Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment, Harvard Business School Press: Boston.
Research on European Union Countries. Procedia Economics and Finance, 3, pp.1030-1035.
 Markman, G.D., Russo, M., Lumpkin, G.T., Jennings, P. and Mair, J., 2016. Entrepreneurship as a platform for pursuing multiple goals: A special issue on sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), pp.673-694.
 Parrish, B.D., 2010. Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: Principles of organization design. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), pp.510-523.
 Patzelt, H. and Shepherd, D.A., 2011. Recognizing opportunities for sustainable development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), pp.631-652.
 Spence, M., Ben Boubaker Gherib, J. and Ondoua Biwolé, V., 2011. Sustainable entrepreneurship: is entrepreneurial will enough? A north–south comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(3), pp.335-367.
 Stokes, D., Wilson, N. and Mador, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship. Hampshire, UK: South-Western Cengage Learning
 Veciana, J.M. (2007). Entrepreneurship as a Scientific Research Program. In Cuervo, Á, Ribeiro, D. and roig, S. (Eds.), Entrepreneurship: Concept, Theory and Prospective (23- 71). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
 Weber, C., Kratzer,J., 2013. Social entrepreneurship, social networks and social value creation: a quantitative analysis among social entrepreneurs. Int. J. Entrep. Ventur. 5 (3), 217-239
 Weidinger, C., 2014. Business Success through Sustainability. In Sustainable Entrepreneurship (pp. 287-301). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.